Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Education News

Computer Science Enrollment Up 10% Last Fall 173

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the turing-isn't-complete-yet dept.
dcblogs writes "Computer science enrollments increased 10% last fall, according to the Computer Research Association. At the peak of the dot-com era, the average enrollment in computer science departments was 398, but by 2007 it had declined in half. Enrollments now average 253 students per department. Enrollments have now increased in the last three years. The CRA's annual survey tracks students enrolled at Ph.D.-granting institutions. Compared to the dot-com era, the interest today in computer science may be 'a more reasoned response to a field that seems positioned at the hub of just about every national priority.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Computer Science Enrollment Up 10% Last Fall

Comments Filter:
  • by bmacs27 (1314285) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @11:44AM (#35794432)
    Ackbar said it best.
    • by kiehlster (844523)
      Actually, this really isn't a joke in this context. I can definitely see history repeating itself. I joined the roster of CS students during a period when Computer Science was suddenly a hot topic only to find that, come graduation, those hot jobs all dried up. I guess I should put my umbrella up for the coming mass of inexperienced job applicants. The buzz is a trap, I tell you.
      • by bmacs27 (1314285)
        I wasn't joking. Honestly, if you want a job, become a Mech E. Talk about central to all the problems we currently face... It seems every time I think my CS degree should be good for something useful, I realize that making useful things often has very little to do with computational complexity, or operating system design. Basically everyone needs to be able to program, which is why some cursory programming should be broadly required with other basic skills like writing and math. That might do something
        • "...become a Mech E. Talk about central to all the problems we currently face...

          Steve Jobs: Make it thinner!
          M.E.: But, but...
          Steve Jobs: *smacks M.E.* Thinner, I said!

    • Do we have programs called "sailing science" or "watchmaking science" or "business science" or "Weaving science" or "Whale oil science Computer science may deal with electronic gadgets but that no longer qualifies it as a science anymore than all the other things I mentioned. All of those were cutting edge endeavors at some point in the last 1000 years. now they are vocations or hobbies like "or "interior design sceince" or "hotel administration science".

      Their is a teeny tiny bit of science left in comp

      • by RogerWilco (99615)

        You make a valid point. But I think that Software Engineering and Management still have a lot to develop. We still don't really know how to do big software projects, most of them fail in one way or another. It might not be the classical Computer Science from the 1970's and 80's, but it's the challenge faced today.
        Next to that new algorithms will always be needed, although that sometimes is almost more Mathematics than CS.

        But even current compiler technology has it's limits. I'm no expert, but at least that'

      • Spoken like someone who never studied computer science. Perhaps you have never heard the name Alan Turing or read the works of Donald Knuth? Surely not with understanding.

        • by bmacs27 (1314285)
          Yea, but that's not science, that's math (or formal science I suppose). I don't think, for instance, Turing would refer to himself as a "computer scientist." I largely agree with parent, computer science was a fad the last thirty years or so because of the novelty and sudden ubiquity of computers. They need to break the departments up and return them to their proper fields, or treat them more like interdepartmental centers. Systems is largely computer engineering, AI/robotics/machine learning are all ve
      • by raddan (519638) *
        As someone who just finished writing a paper (minutes ago) for his graduate empirical methods course, I beg to differ. You can argue that too few CS papers which should be empirical actually are. Fair enough. But there are plenty of areas where good empirical research is being done. Any time the relationship between independent and dependent variables is not known, science is a good place to start. If you haven't come across one of these papers yet, I suggest that you are simply not reading the literat
        • by bmacs27 (1314285)
          Yea, but those papers, to me, belong in what should be the machine learning subset of your statistics department. I really think the computer science moniker is redundant. Nobody called themselves abacus scientists.
          • by raddan (519638) *
            A great deal of computer science has to do with the computational properties of solving a particular kind or class of a problem. So maybe it should be called "computational science", but the reference to the computer is essential here. I strongly disagree with Dijkstra about his statement that "computers are to computer science as telescopes are to astronomy." Computability appears to be a fundamental property of the universe; it clearly affects how computers themselves work, but it also has powerful imp
      • The problem is with that word "computer". Think of it as Computation Science, or Computing Science, or Algorithm Science. That's the core of CS. It's such a fundamental tool, that maybe it ought to be called simply Computation, same as Math is just Math and not Mathematical Science or some such.

        Classic mathematics mostly avoids algorithms. They do the simple stuff like grade school multiplication and greatest common denominator, but not much more. Newton's method and Simpson's Rule is about their lim

    • by timeOday (582209)
      I dunno, I saw this recent article [cnn.com] that CompSci is still among the best-paying degrees - in fact the same as I remember it 20 years ago, with ChemE on top, then CompSci among the other engineering degrees a little lower. One detail that surprised me is Electrical Engineering being a bit under CompSci... when I was in school electrical engineers were the most haughty of the geek set and, I thought, made a bit more than CS.

      That said, that article is all about starting salaries. Business doesn't have a cei

      • Yep. My wife already has an undergrad and a grad degree in soft science, and is now back as an undergrad getting a computer science degree. Why? Because where we work, 23 year old recent computer science grads make more than those of us plugging away for the past 20 years as tech writers. It's not unfair, if you think I'm complaining. They actually have a skill that is harder to learn and provides more value to a software company. You can axe the tech writers in tight times, but you can't axe developers b

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Computer Science drop out rate will increase.

    • by Gutboy (587531)
      I'd be more interested in seeing the graduation rate. I see a lot of people on programming forums who have no business being in a CS program.
  • After seeing what Goldman Sachs can do with a computer, who wouldn't sign up?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      After seeing what Goldman Sachs can do with a computer, who wouldn't sign up?

      The computers (and the people who programmed them) were just patsies. It was the lawyers and lobbyists that let Goldman do what it did.

    • by geekmux (1040042)

      After seeing what Goldman Sachs can do with a computer, who wouldn't sign up?

      Uh, after looking at what Goldman Sachs did and got away with, what "criminal" activity are you referring to? To them, it was merely a rather large business decision, nothing more.

      For further clarification, my sig speaks volumes.

  • ... befor these newly minted CS people? It seems that every company doesn't want anything to do with recent grads or those that want to change fields/jobs within it (i.e. moving up from say help desk or QA) .
    • That's true, but it was true ten years ago, too, and we all found some way to manage.

    • by RingDev (879105) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:02PM (#35794750) Homepage Journal

      Unemployment in the IT field is under 5%, even with the economic down turn. There are jobs for new grads.

      For example, the company I work for is currently looking for a new DBA (preferably senior), a new BI guy, a new SharePoint person, and likely 2 more business/IT analysts. We'd take college grads for any of them but the DBA, and possibly for the DBA if it's the right kind of person.

      Experience is important, but we've got work that needs doing and we're not going to waste money waiting for the perfect hire when we can get a skilled person in and spin them up.

      -Rick

      • Then you are in the minority, I guess. I'm not saying there are not oppurtunities... However, it's discouraging to read job descriptions and have recruiter's either get your hopes up or told by them that companies don't want you because your experience doesn't fit the typical molds.
        • by 2names (531755) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:25PM (#35795158)
          Everyone pay very close attention to this next statement please.

          RECRUITERS DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT YOU.

          To them, you are a commodity, a way to make sure little Johnny gets his new XBox 360 game, and nothing more.

          If you want to find a job, you have to market yourself to the companies at which you would like to work. Get to know the company, try to meet the people in the department in which you are interested, make yourself available to these people, offer to volunteer on a project, etc. If you work this plan at several companies you will be much more likely to find a job that you fit and that also fits you.
  • ... I don't mean to sound negative, but I expect a number of these aren't people who are genuinely interested in computer science, more the kind of person who wants to write an iPhone app and retire a millionaire within 5 years...

    • What are you? nuts? Be a millionaire writing for Apple? I don't think so. Screw that They're going to work on Wall Street and be a billionaire in two years.

      • No, not writing for Apple, writing iPhone apps. Or Facebook games. Or Android apps. Before then, it was writing web pages. Before then it was writing games for microcomputers. Every few years, a few people who jump on a bandwagon in computing make a large profit and the press hypes it. A huge number of people think that they can reproduce this success and enrol in computer-related courses. Then they realise that computer science and programming both actually require the use of the brain and either sw

        • by gad_zuki! (70830)

          To be fair, one's motivations aren't exactly a face tattoo. Sure, maybe Jane gets in CS for make a killing at a startup. Maybe she wants to write apps. Maybe she does. Just because her motivation is money-based or prestige based in the beginning doesn't mean she can't do great things later.

          Yes, physicists are prestige & money-based too. Talk to one. Ask them where they work and why. Ask them why they chose that particular phd program. Sure, there's perhaps more geeky love in hard sciences but there's a

    • by bieber (998013)
      That's how CS students usually are. They're either in it for the money, or they're in it because they like video games and think it will be fun to make them, having no idea what's actually involved. Those kinds of students either drop out/switch majors after a year or two (at my University they require passing a foundation exam before moving on to any 3000-level CS classes, and the pass rate is typically around 30%), or they barely scrape by, get their degree, and subsequently wonder why they're not pulli
    • When I was a freshman in college (God, that was over 10 years ago!) there was a girl on my floor who was majoring in computer engineering. She had seriously never used a computer before. She lasted about two weeks.

      I assume these are the kinds of people you are referring to.

    • Two words: "Weeder Course".

      Now, if the college just wants to move warm bodies through the door, they won't put one in place; don't want to discourage the customers until they've finished paying, after all. At the better class of institutions, though, it shouldn't be too hard to arm-twist the department's Serious Theory dude to run a brutal class that will fairly swiftly divide the 'CS' student population into 'actual CS students', 'purely vocational software engineers', and 'just in it for the money, hav
  • by CrazyJim1 (809850) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @11:48AM (#35794506) Journal
    If you were in college when the dot com era happened and graduated after the bust, you were in worse shape than people who went straight to work out of highschool. The reverse is true now. Since the job market is awful, it is good to be in school now.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by BigDaveyL (1548821)
      I was in school during the boom and graduated (in 3.5 years) in Dec. 2001. During the boom years, I'd get called every couple of weeks for internship oppurtunites. When the bust hit, it was like pulling teeth. And trying to find a real job was painful - so painful, that I stayed on an extra year and a half to get an MS degree in a related field. And it's been hit or miss since then. It seems like companies are more adverse to actually training/investing in staff then they were evevn 10-12 years ago.
      • by bberens (965711)
        Could have been worse, you could have dropped out to work when they were all calling, only to get laid off and find yourself without a degree a year or two later.
        • by xero314 (722674)

          Could have been worse, you could have dropped out to work when they were all calling, only to get laid off and find yourself without a degree a year or two later.

          Yes, that would have sucked, being laid off after gaining two years of real work experience in an environment where getting a senior title, and the knowledge to BS your way through an interview, was being given away like candy. And to think with that two years experience and a senior title, he'd have to be competing against fresh college graduates. Wait, that doesn't sound so bad after all.

    • by jd (1658) <imipak&yahoo,com> on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:36PM (#35795370) Homepage Journal

      That depended. If you were in a college that taught according to the market (ie: Java and web applications) rather than according to the discipline, you were ruined.

      If you were in a college that gave you a flexible background, skills that were transferrable across the industry, and exposure to a range of languages, you could find work that paid damn well after the crash.

      Colleges should NEVER focus on what the marker wants this week. Even without the crash, what's wanted today will NOT be what's wanted 4 years down the road and won't even begin to resemble what's wanted when you're 20-30 years in. If you want to survive in an industry that evolves faster than you can learn a new skill, you have to have learned all the skills you will ever need in the business by the time you step out into the world. Everything beyond that point HAS to be pure reference work for the latest syntax. Do that and the market is irrelevant. You will always be employable.

      • by Kjella (173770)

        If you were in a college that gave you a flexible background, skills that were transferrable across the industry, and exposure to a range of languages, you could find work that paid damn well after the crash.

        If you're the kind who sought that kind of study and did well at it, you'd also be one of those kept on staff during the crash if you'd started working straight from high school. It's easier to stay once you have a foot inside than hit the "we're not hiring" wall, no matter if you're God's gife to CS. I graduated during a slump, two years earlier or two years later I'd be hired flat but not there and then.

        • Alternately, graduate during a slump and either get an MS or start a company. You don't have to work for someone else.
    • by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:40PM (#35795430)

      Since the job market is awful, it is good to be in school now.

      That statement probably should be qualified. There appears to be a price bubble in education at the moment, forcing many students to take loans with onerous terms ( impervious to bankruptcy ). And there's no certainty that the U.S. economy will offer jobs that would let even reasonably-sized student loans be paid off in a reasonable amount of time.

      So honestly, the best I hope for is that the education price bubble will have popped by the time my young kids are done with high-school.

  • How many are actually studying computer science and how many are actually in hopped up vocational programs?

    • by Qzukk (229616)

      Universities are still teaching computer science, much to the chagrin of people like this AC [slashdot.org] who apparently thinks that the degree should be a hopped up vocational program.

      Personally, if employers want votech students they should say so and stop demanding a degree. If they want a degree, they should stop whining about how the degree isn't votech.

      • by RingDev (879105)

        I think it matters on your goal. If you want skills for a job, go to a vocational school and get a tech degree.

        If you want to be doing non-line of business work, go to a university and get a comp sci degree.

        But there are a LOT more jobs that demand CS tech knowledge than CD university knowledge. Not that there is anything wrong with that, it's just the market.

        -Rick

        • by bberens (965711)
          Every programming job I've had has been more vocational tech than computer theory. Every programming job I've had required a bare minimum of a computer science degree.
      • Not just that, they should articulate what it really is that they are looking for so schools can stop shooting wildly.

        I suspect the problem is that they don't know; that they want "someone that is good". To someone skilled in the arts of Human Resources, this can only mean good degree from a good school.

      • Personally, if employers want votech students they should say so and stop demanding a degree. If they want a degree, they should stop whining about how the degree isn't votech.

        And if they want a pliable class of debt slaves, they should keep doing what they are now.

      • Do you think engineering is "vocational?"

        "Algorithm Science," which has been misnamed "Computer Science" in the US, is really a little-needed and little-appreciated discipline. What students want is "Software Engineering." This is also what industry wants. So why are all schools still teaching Algorithm Science, while only a few teach what everyone in that major actually wants?

        Incompetence by school administrators. Cut computer science departments to a fraction of their size. Stick them under Mathematics. T

        • This is also what industry wants. So why are all schools still teaching Algorithm Science, while only a few teach what everyone in that major actually wants?

          Because colleges are not trade schools. If industry is so hot for it, then they can damn well pay for it instead of demanding that people take out loans to study it. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

          • You are implying that universities should close their colleges of engineering. You're cracked. Out of your skull. Completely nuts.

            • Nope, I'm responding to the idea that colleges should be producing what industry demands. If they want it so damn much, they can start training people again. Bunch of greedy whores, the lot of them.
              • On what planet did companies routinely pay for engineering degrees? I'd like to send my kids to your world when they're ready for college.

      • Universities are still teaching computer science, much to the chagrin of people like this AC [slashdot.org] who apparently thinks that the degree should be a hopped up vocational program.

        I never said they weren't still teaching computer science - only that the term 'computer science' is used for a wide variety of disparate degree programs.

    • by xMrFishx (1956084)
      Nothing wrong with a good vocational program as long as it is properly structured and teaches useful skills. You could say "and how many are hopped up degree programs". Looking back at my degree, having done education in both a vocational and a, whatever the opposite word is, standard degree format, I find I have learned considerably more through vocational methodology. My coursework marks have always been consistently better than my exam results. Shame about my English skills, but I'm an engineer not a
      • The problem is not vocational programs in general, it's vocational programs that masquerade as academic degrees. These typically end up combining all of the disadvantages of both: they're light on theory and don't teach things that are current in industry. A lot of people would be better off doing vocational courses, but only if they're good vocational courses. Calling them degrees devalues both good academic qualifications and good vocational courses.
    • by vlm (69642)

      How many are actually studying computer science and how many are actually in hopped up vocational programs?

      Don't forget option 3, which is the "IT" department in the business department, as opposed to "CS" which is in the math department.

      Amusingly the report is about "CS" enrollment, which is all about analysis of algorithms, Knuth, and Scheme/LISP, but all the comments on /. so far are about "IT" jobs, which are all about SQL, TPS reports, and the "COBOL of the New Millennium aka Java"

      • by slyrat (1143997)

        How many are actually studying computer science and how many are actually in hopped up vocational programs?

        Don't forget option 3, which is the "IT" department in the business department, as opposed to "CS" which is in the math department.

        Amusingly the report is about "CS" enrollment, which is all about analysis of algorithms, Knuth, and Scheme/LISP, but all the comments on /. so far are about "IT" jobs, which are all about SQL, TPS reports, and the "COBOL of the New Millennium aka Java"

        The reason for this is that unless you are in a city or town that has a good CS undergrad program the private industry won't know how to tell the difference. So a lot of times if you get a good CS degree you'll still be doing "IT". This isn't entirely to blame on the managers, a lot of times it is the fault of HR that don't know how to tell the difference.

      • Amusingly the report is about "CS" enrollment, which is all about analysis of algorithms, Knuth, and Scheme/LISP, but all the comments on /. so far are about "IT" jobs, which are all about SQL, TPS reports, and the "COBOL of the New Millennium aka Java"

        It's the same conceit that leads them to call themselves "$X Engineers" rather than "Programmers".

  • by Markvs (17298) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @11:58AM (#35794676) Journal
    I started my Master's about 18 months ago after graduating with a Bachelor's in 1995. Why? Cash. Simply put, after a bit over 15 years in the industry you can't advance too far from "Senior SysAdmin" without a Master's. Oh, there are some possibilities but the cold hard fact is that to get anywhere fast it's the way to go, just like having the Bacehlor's kept me ahead of the competition during the .COM days. Sure, I didn't make outrageous money but I've been very comforable since I started working and that's no bad thing.
    Did I learn anything then or am I learning anything now? Not anything directly useful on the job, no. But that's not the point of school anyway. You're there to hone your thought process and take in ideas and points of view you otherwise wouldn't encounter. Science knows, I'd never have taken Java last year if they didn't make me do it for the degree.
    Bottom line: We need more IT professionals that are... IT *professionals*. Too often I've interviewed people that can't write or speak professionally (no, I don't care about accents!), or are just plain sloppy either in their manner of dress, their grasp of their skills, or (worst) their grasp of what work is about. The money is out there to be made, but getting the right person for an IT job in a financial firm is often a long process. A degree in CS is a good starting point and if nothing else lays a foundation for becoming a professional.
    • I started my Master's about 18 months ago after graduating with a Bachelor's in 1995. Why? Cash. Simply put, after a bit over 15 years in the industry you can't advance too far from "Senior SysAdmin" without a Master's.

      Absolute rubbish. Our previous software architect is easily the most brilliant software engineer that I have ever met and he didn't even have a bachelors degree. Now he's giving lectures about functional programming at campuses across the US (including MIT) and is a co-author of a book of the same subject matter (that will probably end up making an appearance on Slashdot in a few years).

      On the flip side, I've seen people with a Master's in CS that couldn't even handle a SysAdmin gig. Just having the c

      • sure, he made good on that, but it isn't the common case. I talked to one of those guys (built the audio chip for the C64) and he told be that the BS was important. Coming from him, I'd say that has weight.
    • by antdude (79039)

      You're old! :) I am over 35 and people call me an old fart. :P

    • by dohnut (189348)

      I am 37 too and we are very different (not better or worse, just different).

      I'm not a computer scientist and I'm not a software engineer (and, no offense, but thank goodness I'm not a system admin). I'm a code monkey, a digital carpenter if you will. I've had my ass planted in front of a computer since the age of 9 -- it's what I do, it's what I love. I have been gainfully employed as a coder since the mid 90's. I achieved my ideal position and status the first day I went to work professionally -- a cod

  • positioned at the hub of just about every national priority

    like plumbers and janitors, right?

  • by ect5150 (700619) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:19PM (#35795040) Journal
    Enrollments are up because unemployment is up. Pure and simple. People lose a job, they go back and get retrained. Enrollment is up across the board - not just in Comp Sci.
    • Enrollments are up 25% because of unemployment? Somehow I find that unlikely. More likely is that we finally have some star companies for the current generation. They see Facebook, Twitter, Google, Apple, game developers, and others that are developing products that are new, exciting, and targeted at them, and they want to get involved in the process that makes those products. The kids before that saw the .com bubble burst and probably had a bad taste in their mouths when thinking about the prospects offere

  • by teknopurge (199509) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:22PM (#35795092) Homepage
    CS is the study of discrete math and algorithms, not writing code. We didn't have a single class during my undergrad on writing code - things like C and Java were used to describe algorithms but we were expected to learn the languages on our own time, if we didn't already know them.
    • by DarthVain (724186)

      Be happy. I took like 7 when I went in '95. While knowing how to write code is useful, the languages are not.

      A) You don't know the lifespan of the language
      B) You have no idea if the work you do will involve it

      so they are really just teaching aids.

      It was instructive to see how different syntax can be, particularly on different generations of language...
      I got Assembly, COBOL, Pascal, C, VB to name a few. I've used a little VB on the job (mostly as VBA or as part of other programs), and several scripting langu

    • by AuMatar (183847) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @03:41PM (#35798042)

      And IT isn't programming at all. IT is the domain of setting up computers and networks and sys admins. Programmers are their own category, and lumping them into "IT" just confuses every conversation since their jobs are so different. Its like calling a mech e who designs engines and a mechanic "automotive technologists". At that point the name is meaningless.

    • Discrete math and algorithms are subsets of Computer Science, but doesn't cover everything. Automata theory, for instance, makes use of some portions of discrete math, but is an entity all its own. The study of languages, how grammars defined them, and compiler design are very much a part of computer science.

      CS is largely a math degree, but it's a whole lot more varied than what you've described. If you didn't even approach languages in your undergrad, then you weren't getting a full dose.

  • Computer Science is still a hot field, regardless of the current dot-com bubble. People will always need software engineers, website developers, database administrators, and general IT guys.
  • by pak9rabid (1011935) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:36PM (#35795374)
    Wake me up when these 10% actually complete their CS degree.
  • by ErichTheRed (39327) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:38PM (#35795398)

    I'm surprised about this statistic as well as happy. I was pretty much sure CS and other science work was completely written off by US students as nonviable. After all, it's easier to go into investment banking or management consulting, and the course load is much easier for a bigger payoff.

    Some people have posted sentiments along the lines of -- "is this actual CS being studied, or a checkbox for an IT job?" Being in IT, I can say that having a background in a science or engineering discipline (doesn't matter which one) is a huge asset. The abiltiy to logically break down a system or problem, analyze dependencies and troubleshoot separates a really good IT guru from the guy who just got out of a certification class. (If you have this ability naturally, then great...but most people need to actually practice on something to get good at it, hence the degree.) This also can lead to more job satisfaction -- I enjoy my job because my company gives me interesting problems to solve, partially because they know I'll be able to deal with the "interesting" stuff better than someone who can just follow directions. I have a non-CS background (chemistry,) but the same scientific, logical reasoning applies. For example, when ýou're trying to figure out a poorly documented application with no access to the developers or support, and something goes wrong, this kicks in. Someone who just took a certification class will (may!) know how to drive the product's GUI or CLI, and often changes six things at a time in the vague hope that something will work. A science-trained individual is much more likely to methodically approach troubleshooting, and understand how what they do possibly affects connected systems. There are huge exceptions in both cases, and I've seen them, but it's a good rule of thumb that someone with a science/engineering background is going to be a better candidate for a job. Maybe my judgement is a little clouded since I'm in systems integration, where this skillset is even more important to have. Anything outside of a formulaic procedure, or a situation where you actually have to come up with the procedure is better staffed by someone who can deal with the higher-level work.

    One interesting side effect of this is that if enrollment in good CS programs gets high enough, employers will no longer be able to sell the "we can't find qualified Americans to do our jobs." Like I said, I only agree with them to a point -- there's a lot of bozos in our field that don't belong and are better suited to other professions. However, there are a lot of good, qualified people out there...they just don't work cheap and are usually employed unless a major layoff/restructuring leaves you without a seat.

    • by hoggoth (414195) on Tuesday April 12, 2011 @12:55PM (#35795686) Journal

      > "we can't find qualified Americans to do our jobs."

      Of course they will continue saying this. The qualification they are talking about is accepting being paid in the equivalent of 10 Rupies a day.

    • One interesting side effect of this is that if enrollment in good CS programs gets high enough, employers will no longer be able to sell the "we can't find qualified Americans to do our jobs.

      I don't follow the logic here. There are already plenty of unemployed people in IT. The complaint has always been about getting more visas for foreign IT workers and getting favorable laws passed to outsource. Now, if graduation rates reach the point that wages approach those in outsourcing target nations...

  • If that's your thing-- go ahead.

    Or you can get some computer courses and a business degree. Graduate earlier, start lower pay but end up higher pay, not work holidays, have more parties and dating prospects, play golf with the bosses.

    IT is viewed as a sucking hole of money by every company.
    IT people are viewed as fair to work on sundays and holidays 12 hours a day without extra compensation.

    If you are in a publicly held company- you can't write a line of code for production without a non-programmer approvi

    • I'd say the best senior management for technical projects are the ones who were writing code 10-20 years ago. Someone who majored in business will never fully understand the intricacies of development. I have seen many a project in my company go askew with project managers who thought they could just foist deadlines on their team ignoring developer estimates of how long they would like to take to develop a system.

      The result? The good developers quit and you're left with a serious brain drain and cruddy p
    • No dating prospects? Get on eHarmony and meet an elementary school teacher. They have the same problems finding dates that we do. And they're educated, intellectual, dedicated. Attractive. It worked for me - I married one last year.
      • Creative. I like it.

        Teachers get no respect and are being unfairly laid off in droves right now.

        They also suffer under massive bureaucracies which won't let them work the way they want to work.

        It used to be a nice job when they had freedom to teach as they liked, they had awesome retirement benefits, and they didn't take a status hit for low pay.

    • Your dichotomy is inherently fasle, not to mention Comp Sci != IT, stupid.
      • It's not really a dichotomy. I'm not dividing it into two parts. I'm saying getting a Comp Sci degree leads to the set of jobs which suck.

        I agree- Comp Sci != IT... except (speaking as a person with a computer science degree) it really is for most Comp Sci graduates. Very few actually do true Comp Sci work.

        You must go on to an advanced degree to work on Comp Sci. So most become software engineers, software designers-- IT people.

        Now TRUE Comp Sci on the other hand... well.... it also has no dating prospe

  • My guess is that some of that boost is coming from the thriving mobile industry.
    A good chunk of those new students are secretly thinking of making the next angry birds.

Information is the inverse of entropy.

Working...